THE MOVIE SEEMED LIKE A RUN OFF THE MILL BAD CRIME/HEIST FILM, BUT IT WASN'T. IT WAS WORSE. THE DIRECTOR, JOHN LUESSENHOP, HAD ONLY ONE FILM BEFORE TAKERS, WHICH WAS THE LESS BAD BUT STILL BAD LOCKDOWN. LUESSENHOP WAS ALSO THE SCREENWRITER, ALONG WITH GABRIEL CASSEUS AND TWO OTHER SCREENWRITERS WHOSE NAMES AREN'T WORTH MENTIONING.

IT WAS AUGUST OF 2010 THAT THIS FILM GOT RELEASED BY SCREENGEMS (THOUGH THS IS DEFINATELY NOT A "GEM"), AND SOMEHOW, IT MANAGED TO STAYING THE TOP FIVE FOR A WHILE, RAKING IN ENOUGH TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A BOX-OFFICE HIT. THIS IS UNLIKE FILMS LIKE MAX PAYNE OR BANGKOK DANGEROUS. THIS MOVIE ALSO HAS A FEW RECOGNIZABLE PEOPLE. ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATED MATT DILLION, PAUL WALKER,TWO TIME RAZZIE WINNING HAYDEN CHRISTIANSEN, CHRIS BROWN AND T.I.

THE MOVIE, WHILE GETTING A 30% ON ROTTEN TOMATOES, DID BETTER THAN IT SHOULD HAVE, AND AS A RESULT, THERE SEEMS TO BE BUZZ ABOUT IT BEING A FRANCHISE. TAKERS SHOULD BE "TAKEN DOWN" FOR BEING SO COCKY BECAUSE OF THIS FLUKE.

Note: I don't know how to put the poster on my post. If someone can show me how, that would be great.

You go to Rotten Tomatoes or another website with pictures from the movie. You then choose a pic that looks funny, looks goofy or stands out. Selection of the pic is the most important step. You then paste the pic at the bottom of your post. You then think of a funny caption to go under the pic. Making up a funny caption is the second most important step.

As for Takers, I feel it was a so-so, maybe even an okay, movie. It's not bad enough for us. We've had a lot of movies like that this year, which initially looked like they were tailor-made for us, but when they came out, they weren't bad. They were just mediocre.

Posted By: Jennifar
Date Posted: February 03 2011 at 10:54am

Thanks for information of selecting, judging and analysis of the movies.